High Court · 2025

WP No. 23044 of 2025IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED: 26-06-2025CORAMTHE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMYWP No. 23044 of 2025ANDWMP NO. 25886 OF 2025,WMP NO. 25887 OF 2025Sankarji Prithviraj Sons,Represented by its Proprietor, Sureshkumar Prithviraj Kawad, No.57, 1st Floor, Bhandari Building, Narayana Mudali Street, Sowcarpet, Chennai-079.Petitioner(s)Vs1. The Deputy Commissioner (ST) (FAC),O/o.The Deputy Commissioner (ST),GST Appeal, Chennai I, 2nd Floor, Main Building, Room No.210, No.1, Greams Road, Chennai-06.2.The Deputy Commercial Tax Officer/The Deputy State Tax Officer,NSC Bose Road Assessment Circle, Chennai North Division,Integrated Commercial Taxes Building,No.32, Elephant Gate Bridge Road, Vepery, Chennai-03.Respondent(s) https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 23044 of 2025PRAYER:-Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for an issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the 2nd respondent demand order made in No. ZD330823054711J dated 10.08.2023 and the order of the 1st respondent dated 09.05.2025 made in ARN/AD331124051860H/A2 and quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to given an opportunity of personal hearing.For Petitioner(s):Mr.P.Suresh BabuFor Respondent(s):Ms.P.Selvi Government Advocate (taxes)ORDERThis Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking to call for the 2nd respondent demand order made in No. ZD330823054711J dated 10.08.2023 and the order of the 1st respondent dated 09.05.2025 made in ARN/AD331124051860H/A2 and quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to given an opportunity of personal hearing.2.Ms.P.Selvi, learned Government Advocate (Taxes), takes notice on behalf of the respondents. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 23044 of 2025 3.By consent of the parties, the main writ petition is taken up for disposal at the admission stage itself.4.Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that, in the present case, the petitioner have not received any physical copy of the show cause notice and also personal hearing notice. The show cause notice dated 12.06.2023 was uploaded in the GST Portal tab and the petitioner had no ocassion to open the GST Portal. Even the impugned assessment order dated 10.08.2023 was also uploaded in the GST portal, which is violation of principle of natural justice. He would further submit that the petitioner after knowing about the impugned assessment order being passed by the 2nd respondent, had preferred an appeal before the 1st respondent by paying 10% statutory deposit of the disputed tax demand. However, the appeal got rejected on the ground of limitation vide order dated 09.05.2025. Hence, the petitioner is ready and willing to pay another 15% of the disputed tax demand in respect of the impugned assessment period and prayed to set aside the impugned orders directing the 2nd respondent to permit the petitioner to file their reply and https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 23044 of 2025provide an opportunity of personal hearing so that the petitioner would be able to substantiate their case. 5.Learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents would submit that as per the voluntary submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, subject to the deposit of 15% of the disputed tax demand in addition to the 10% deposit already being made by the petitioner in respect of the impugned assessment period, if the Court feels it appropriate and it is a fit case for re-consideration, this Court may consider and pass orders.6.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents and perused the materials available on record. 7.Considering the above submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and upon perusal of the materials, it is evident that the impugned show cause notice was uploaded on the GST Portal Tab. According to the https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 23044 of 2025petitioner, the petitioner was not aware of the issuance of the show cause notice issued through the GST Portal and the original of the said show cause notice was not furnished to them. No doubt sending notice by uploading in portal is a sufficient service, but, the Officer who is sending the repeated reminders, inspite of the fact that no response from the petitioner to the show cause notices etc., the Officer should have applied his/her mind and explored the possibility of sending notices by way of other modes prescribed in Section 169 of the GST Act, which are also the valid mode of service under the Act, otherwise it will not be an effective service, rather, it would only fulfilling the empty formalities. Merely passing an ex parte order by fulfilling the empty formalities will not serve any useful purpose and the same will only pave way for multiplicity of litigations, not only wasting the time of the Officer concerned, but also the precious time of the Appellate Authority/Tribunal and this Court as well. Thus, when there is no response from the tax payer to the notice sent through a particular mode, the Officer who is issuing notices should strictly explore the possibilities of sending notices through some other mode as prescribed in Section 169(1) of the Act, preferably by way of RPAD, which would ultimately https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 23044 of 2025achieve the object of the GST Act. 8.Thus, in such circumstances, this Court is of the view that the impugned assessment order dated 10.08.2023 came to be passed without affording opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner to establish their case, thereby violating the principles of natural justice and that it is just and necessary to provide an opportunity to the petitioner to establish their case on merits and in accordance with law.9.For the reasons stated above, this Court is inclined to set aside the impugned assessment order dated 10.08.2023 passed by the 2nd respondent and to quash the impugned rejection order dated 09.05.2025 passed by the 1st respondent. Accordingly, this Court passes the following order:- (i) The impugned appeal rejection order dated 09.05.2025 is hereby quashed and the impugned assessment order dated 10.08.2023 is hereby set aside on condition that the petitioner deposits 15% of the disputed tax amount in respect of the impugned assessment period in addition to the https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 23044 of 202510% statutory deposit already made, as agreed by the petitioner, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.(ii) The petitioner shall file their reply/objection along with the required documents, if any, within a period of two weeks thereafter.(iii) On filing of such reply/objection by the petitioner, the 2nd respondent shall consider the same and issue a 14 days clear notice by fixing the date of personal hearing to the petitioner and thereafter, pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law, after hearing the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible. 10.With the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. There is no order as to costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.26-06-2025rstIndex:Yes/NoSpeaking/Non-speaking orderInternet:YesNeutral Citation:Yes/No https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 23044 of 2025 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 23044 of 2025To1.The Deputy Commissioner (ST) (FAC),O/o.The Deputy Commissioner (ST), GST Appeal, Chennai I, 2nd Floor, Main Building, Room No.210, No.1, Greams Road, Chennai-06.2.The Deputy Commercial Tax Officer/The Deputy State Tax OfficerNSC Bose Road Assessment Circle, Chennai North Division,Integrated Commercial Taxes Building,No.32, Elephant Gate Bridge Road, Vepery, Chennai-03. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 23044 of 2025KRISHNAN RAMASAMY J.rstWP No. 23044 of 2025AND WMP NO. 25886 OF 2025,WMP NO. 25887 OF 202526-06-2025